Verizon has, in recent times, been locking the bootloaders and other elements of many of the devices that they provide *by choice of no one but themselves*, needlessly restricting the operation and modification of those devices by the user in manners that are not only restricting the freedom of customers in a monopolistic manner, but in violation of the terms set forth by the FCC by encouragement from Google (4.6 billion worth) for open access. For those who are unaware the implications of a locked bootloader or self-authenticating secured device, these restrictions deny any customer that may desire to modify the device's software or firmware to function differently and in a more useful manner. A summary of the auction document containing the basic contents of the terms for open access can be found here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/27.16 with the full document (including some "exceptions" that Verizon has used in its own defense) located here: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-132A1.pdf

Within that text you will find that the only allowable exclusions are for the second that it must comply with all applicable laws and may not violate any other regulations, but first that the carrier may lock or limit a devices ability as "necessary for the management or protection of the licensee's network". What is troubling here is that some devices have been allowed unlocked in their bootloader, and still other bootloader unlocked phones are allowed to be brought to the carrier and use it with a service account. This unequal treatment invalidates and voids any excuse that it may provide any such security or management. 

One argument that was made in prior contact with Verizon was outlined on page 90, footnote 502, however it only applies to the main operating system (arguably a categorization the bootloader could be excluded from) and defends that they may have choice of what they may install. This does not directly run afoul to open access as written, however may not be used as such justification.

If Verizon were to be noticed as doing this by the general public, the FCC is then forced to make a call and may not ignore the issue. The solution that Verizon may at this time provide is to provide a firmware update, signed by them, for each phone released since the purchase of Block C that may be applied by the user with minimal effort, and no unnecessary prerequisites, that would allow for the removal of any lock or secure authentication at the request of the user even in violation of warranty, as has been common practice on carrier unlocked or developer phones. Please, share this petition to let more people be aware of it. It's not some little thing, and even though this specific issue may be below worthy of attention by most people, it sheds light on corporate practice that frivolously throws aside the interests of consumers for petty corporate gain with shady excuses and justification at best, and downright evasion of lawful practice in the worst.